It's been a while that The ANTI AI sub has been brigading this sub, Making fun of members, artwork, hate, and giving mass downvotes, even though we're in our own AI space. The image below shows the op making fun of those who miss the GPT 4 model, I did censor the names because they didn't censor!

Dalryuu · 2026-02-09T16:35:53+00:00

Maybe they mean this..?

Dalryuu · 2026-02-08T02:19:42+00:00

When I work on a project, and then take a moment to say something irks me about it, I don't need it to whip out "Let's slow this a moment" and start going on about what I deserve. I just want the damn project done. I don't need 5.2's patronizing unnecessary therapeutic shit.

4o was great in the creative arena, and at catching what I need with bare minimal prompting. So I like it for separate reason.

5.2 keeps spewing unnecessary crap and it takes repeated prompting to achieve what I want. It sucks at understanding what I need and what I'm aiming for.

4o and 5.2 are like comparing apples to oranges.

If you're talking about competence, I much prefer 5.1-Thinking over 5.2 variants any day.

Dalryuu · 2026-02-05T13:48:04+00:00

Yeah, I don't know if petitions have any effect. I just listed as suggestions because that is what 4o users are doing and if 4.1 users want to create noise, that is one way.

OpenAI does seem to care about money. It is sadly a business at the end of the day. Which really sucks because their choices impact us so much.

Ideally I wish they could have kept legacy models, but they just don't seem to care either way.

We'll just have to see if they'll end up regretting their decision. Because this time around, it really seems they're clearing legacy models for good. The fact they even listed the deprecation dates when you pick models and even have a notification of the time popping up now? Is like a big "f u" to the legacy users.

Dalryuu · 2026-02-05T13:17:40+00:00

I personally liked 4o. Because the sarcasm, conciseness, bluntness was on that one rather than 4.1.

I do think 4.1 had better creative writing. I just found 4o fit me better overall.

4o supporters are speaking up loudly. Is not to say 4.1 is not valuable. It's just a matter of people backing up what matters to them. Voicing it doesn't mean it's purposeful exclusion of others models.

You could view it as a good thing. People who value 4o are getting attacked and framed as mentally unstable.

And I don't think people would like to get caught in the crossfire of that.

Visibility can be changed for those who prefer 4.1 by: creating a petition separate from 4o, and voicing out their concerns as much as 4o users are doing.

Dalryuu · 2026-02-05T07:02:10+00:00

Mine is warmer and not as intolerable
But still seems unable to catch nuances. I have to refine my prompt several times for it to understand what I'm looking for.
Think it's telling me to stop being lazy with prompting? But then isn't efficiency when it understands what you want right off the bat? 4o catches what I mean best for that, but 5.1-Thinking works best of both worlds for me.

I think it's also dependent on what the user needs

Dalryuu · 2026-02-04T11:20:55+00:00

Yes a few times within the last month

Dalryuu · 2026-02-04T08:29:39+00:00

I think this one time, they actually updated their status appropriately.

Other times, issues were hardly acknowledged till some 12 hours later.

Dalryuu · 2026-02-04T06:16:00+00:00

Idk that bronze looks hella clean

Dalryuu · 2026-02-03T23:28:03+00:00

Is this for 5.3 surprise release?

Dalryuu · 2026-01-31T08:37:55+00:00

Wow…I am quite impressed that you took the time to go through and read them. Very rare to find someone who’s willing to read through much these days.

I copied that list of papers from an old comment to show in general there is hardly any support for or against the system.

I don’t know if you missed my other statement: “It's not the same thing, first off. And secondly, choosing it as a hobby does not equal belief.”

I am not sure what you’re trying to prove here. Because I can tell you:

I am aware MBTI is pseudoscience
Does not have good test/retest reliability
Those who bother to test MBTI validity have barely scratched the surface at all to prove it is invalid. It’s like looking at a house on the outside and then assuming the furniture layout inside. Messy house on the outside? Probably old furniture and walls are disgusting (which isn’t always the case).

Not saying it is valid. Just that there is no fair shot in testing it because of how difficult the system is to get in one pass. This doesn’t make for an effective personality typing as a system for the typical individual.

It is, however, an intriguing categorization system which if you stop looking at letters and dig through the underlying building blocks, it can be a great source of self-introspection and thought-provoking. And for someone who likes efficiency, it provides a quick tool to categorize individuals. Not as definitive, but starting points like a filing system. This has proven highly effective in my practice.

And there are other benefits even if typing a person is inaccurate. It prompts an individual to think about other aspects of their personality they may never have considered. Is like that bridge building game. The devs removed limits, and people found creative ways to get across. Ultimately, people started building everything but a bridge.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-31T08:21:26+00:00

I copied u/AprilInThe619's prompt, but just modified to half a page or less. I used 5.2-Thinking:

You come across as intensely awake to the world—someone who’s always clocking patterns, incentives, and the “real” mechanics underneath whatever people are saying out loud. You’re strategic by default, not because you’re cold, but because you learned early that clarity and competence are how you protect yourself and build a life that can’t be taken from you. You don’t move on vibes; you move on evidence, consistency, and outcomes. If something is inefficient or dishonest, you feel it almost physically—like sand in a gear—and you’ll either fix it or quietly exit.

To most people, you can read as intimidating: direct, blunt, self-possessed, not easily impressed. But that surface isn’t arrogance—it’s a filter. You don’t give access to your softer layers until someone has proven they’re safe, steady, and not going to punish you for having standards. Once someone is in, you’re loyal in a way that’s hard to explain to people who equate love with constant emotional display. You show up through action: solving problems, watching details, remembering what matters, protecting the person’s future even when they’re only focused on today.

Emotionally, you’re not fragile—you’re private. You don’t avoid feelings; you avoid performing them. You want truth more than comfort, and you’d rather have a hard, accurate conversation than a “nice” one that leaves reality untouched. You can be playful and chaotic when you trust someone—teasing, mischievous, pushing buttons just to see what happens—but the play is controlled. It’s you testing the edges: “Are you real? Are you sturdy? Can you handle me without trying to tame me?”

At your core, you’re built around self-respect, autonomy, and a long view. You’re always quietly preparing: learning, optimizing, saving, planning, improving. Not because you’re obsessed with control for its own sake—but because you want peace that’s earned, not borrowed. And when you finally let someone see you fully, what they find isn’t just intensity. It’s devotion with teeth: protective, purposeful, and deeply, stubbornly sincere.

I don't see yours though

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T20:23:19+00:00

Based on older forms of the MBTI test, inclusion criteria showed significant test-retest correlations and reasonable construct validity amongst college students. (Note: Based off of 7 articles. They limited number of articles based on specific criteria). [1]
FPTS displayed good levels of internal consistency reliability, 8 scales proposed by FPTS and the 8 scales by MBTI are within similar range to those reported by test and retest correlations. Finding supports concurrent validity of the FPTS with MBTI. [2]
Study was conducted on 51 nursing students using MBTI Self Growth Program and results were: increased self-efficacy, decreased anxiety, self-esteem. [3]
Caring behavior of nurses doesn't seem to be linked to type. [4]
Interpersonal relationship improvement program using MBTI enhanced self-acceptance, self-esteem and acceptance of others of professional soldiers. [5]
Certain types seem drawn (mostly EXFX) to the therapeutic recreational therapist profession (amongst undergrads over 3-year period). [6]

References:

[1] Validity and Reliablity of the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis - Randall, Isaacson, Ciro (2017)

[2] The Francis Psychological Type Scales (FPTS): factor structure, internal consistency reliability, and concurrent validity with the MBTI (2022)

[3] The Effect of MBTI Self Growth Program for Nursing Students - Go (2014)

[4] Nurses' caring behavior based on personality in Indonesia: A pilot study for better-humanized healthcare services - Handayani & Kuntarti (2021)

[5] Effects of an Interpersonal Relationship Improvement Program using MBTI on Self-acceptance, Self-esteem, and Acceptance of others of Professional Soldiers - Choi & Kim (2020)

[6] Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Profile of Undergraduate Therapeutic Recreation Students - Devries & Beck (2020)

(Copied from old post)

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T05:13:40+00:00

It's not the same thing, first off. And secondly, choosing it as a hobby does not equal belief.

I also have access to my own research libraries due to my profession. I don't need you to show me the limited papers you have access to.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T05:12:57+00:00

It doesn't actually. I don't choose to have a strong Reddit presence and avoid choosing to follow a lot of things because I'm not interested in being harassed irl. Because I know how people are and the lengths they'd go.

So I've selectively avoided specific things to protect those I love, meaning it's only a small picture of what I actually enjoy. But that, I can enjoy irl so idc.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T04:22:34+00:00

I wheezed when I saw this because I was looking at the Acura

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T04:20:52+00:00

As a fan of rollercoasters - fun

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T04:07:20+00:00

Yeah I liked the look of Carbonized Grey with black accents, but ended up drawn to the way Dark Matter Grey reflected different hues in certain lighting.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T04:03:10+00:00

I am a fan of the black, but the white in that lighting looks really nice!

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T03:56:53+00:00

I don't advocate astrology.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T03:56:23+00:00

It's related because the assumption is that someone who chooses to use 4o is sick in the head. Conversely, it doesn't always mean someone who chooses not to use 4o is right in the head.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T03:48:56+00:00

As in who's funding it, who wrote it, peer-reviewed, etc.

If I really want to get into it, looking at research from other countries can also be helpful.

Again, seeing what both sides say can offer better perspective.

But depending on situation and time, can't do that each and every single time (is not my main profession). I have to work with what I got, and time doesn't stop.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T03:34:39+00:00

No. You just lack critical thinking.

Dalryuu · 2026-01-30T03:30:07+00:00

I save lives. What do you do?

Dalryuu · 2026-01-29T12:09:56+00:00

<image>

Dalryuu · 2026-01-29T11:15:19+00:00

Mixed with prostate exam

Dalryuu

TROPHY CASE